The addition of deep hyperthermia to gemcitabine-based chemoradiation may achieve enhanced survival in unresectable locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the pancreas.

INTRODUCTION: Driven by the current unsatisfactory outcomes for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), a biologically intensified clinical protocol was developed to explore the feasibility and efficacy of FOLFORINOX chemotherapy followed by deep hyperthermia concomitant with chemoradiation and subsequent FOLFORINOX chemotherapy in patients with LAPC. METHODS: Nine patients with LAPC were treated according to the HEATPAC Phase II trial protocol which consists of 4 cycles of FOLFORINOX chemotherapy followed by gemcitabine-based chemoradiation to 56 Gy combined with weekly deep hyperthermia and then a further 8 cycles of FOLFORINOX chemotherapy. RESULTS: One grade three related toxicity was reported and two tumours became resectable. The median overall survival was 24 months and 1 year overall survival was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Intensification of chemoradiation with deep hyperthermia was feasible in nine consecutive patients with LAPC.

Choice of first line systemic treatment in pancreatic cancer among national experts.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer depend on various factors, including performance status, tumor burden and patient preferences. Metastatic pancreatic cancer is incurable and many systemic treatment options have been investigated over the past decades. This analysis of patterns of practice was performed to identify decision criteria and their impact on the choice of first-line management of metastatic pancreatic cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Members of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) Gastrointestinal Cancer Group were contacted and agreed to participate in this analysis. Decision trees for the first line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer from 9 centers in Switzerland were collected and analyzed based on the objective consensus methodology to identify consensus and discrepancies in clinical decision-making. RESULTS: The final treatment algorithms included 3 decision criteria (comorbidities, performance status and age) and 5 treatment options: FOLFIRINOX, FOLFOX, gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine mono and best supportive care. CONCLUSION: We identified multiple decision criteria relevant to all participating centers. We found consensus for the treatment of young (age below 65) patients with good performance status with FOLFIRINOX. For patients with increasing age and reducing performance status there was a decreasing trend to use gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel. Gemcitabine monotherapy was typically offered to patients in the presence of comorbidities. For patients with ECOG 3-4, most of the experts recommended BSC.

Days spent in acute care hospitals at the end of life of cancer patients in four Swiss cantons: a retrospective database study (SAKK 89/09).

Number of days spent in acute hospitals (DAH) at the end of life is regarded as an important care quality indicator for cancer patients. We analysed DAH during 90 days prior to death in patients from four Swiss cantons. Claims data from an insurance provider with about 20% market share and patient record review identified 2086 patients as dying of cancer. We calculated total DAH per patient. Multivariable generalised linear modelling served to evaluate potential explanatory variables. Mean DAH was 26 days. In the multivariable model, using complementary and alternative medicine (DAH = 33.9; +8.8 days compared to non-users) and canton of residence (for patient receiving anti-cancer therapy, Zürich DAH = 22.8 versus Basel DAH = 31.4; for other patients, Valais DAH = 22.7 versus Ticino DAH = 33.7) had the strongest influence. Age at death and days spent in other institutions were additional significant predictors. DAH during the last 90 days of life of cancer patients from four Swiss cantons is high compared to most other countries. Several factors influence DAH. Resulting differences are likely to have financial impact, as DAH is a major cost driver for end-of-life care. Whether they are supply- or demand-driven and whether patients would prefer fewer days in hospital remains to be established.

Do all patients with advanced HER2 positive breast cancer need upfront-chemo when receiving trastuzumab? Randomized phase III trial SAKK 22/99.

Background: HER2-targeted therapy plus chemotherapy is standard treatment in advanced HER2+ breast cancer. Trastuzumab alone followed by addition of chemotherapy at disease progression versus upfront combination therapy has not been elucidated. Patients and methods: One-hundred seventy-five patients with measurable/evaluable HER2+ advanced disease without previous HER2-directed therapy were randomized to trastuzumab alone followed, at disease progression, by the combination with chemotherapy (Arm A) or upfront trastuzumab plus chemotherapy (Arm B). Chemotherapy could be stopped after ≥6 cycles in responding patients, trastuzumab was continued until progression. The primary endpoint of this superiority trial was time to progression (TTP) on combined trastuzumab-chemotherapy (Combination-TTP) in both arms. Secondary endpoints included response rate, TTP, overall survival, quality of life and toxicity. Results: Combination-TTP was longer than expected in both arms, 12.2 months in Arm A and 10.3 months in Arm B and not significantly different (hazard ratio [HR] 0.7; 95% CI 0.5-1.1; P =0.1). Overall survival was also not significantly different (HR 0.9; 95% CI 0.6-1.5; P = 0.55). In Arm A, the median TTP before introduction of chemotherapy was 3.7 months (95% CI 2.3-5.4), yet at 2 years 6% of patients were still on trastuzumab alone. Patients without visceral disease had a Combination-TTP of 21.8 months in arm A, compared with 10.1 months in arm B (unplanned analysis HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-4.2, P = 0.03). Patients with visceral disease showed no difference. Toxicity was chemotherapy-related. Conclusion: The outcome of patients receiving sequential trastuzumab-chemotherapy or upfront combination was similar. We failed to demonstrate superiority of the sequential approach. These results nevertheless suggest chemotherapy and its toxicity can be deferred, especially in patients with indolent, non-visceral disease. Despite a larger non-inferiority confirmatory study would be needed, these findings represent an additional proof of concept that de-escalation strategies can be discussed in individual patients.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of trametinib plus dabrafenib as first-line therapy for metastatic BRAF V600-mutated melanoma in the Swiss setting.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of patients with metastatic melanomas that harbour BRAF V600E or V600K mutations with trametinib plus dabrafenib appears to be superior to treatment with vemurafenib alone. This treatment regimen is likely to become available in Switzerland in the near future. OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness of trametinib plus dabrafenib. METHODS: A Markov cohort simulation was conducted to model the clinical course of typical patients with metastatic melanoma. Information on response rates, clinical condition and follow-up treatments were derived and transition probabilities estimated based on the results of a clinical trial that compared treatment with trametinib plus dabrafenib vs. vemurafenib alone. RESULTS: Treatment with trametinib plus dabrafenib was estimated to cost an additional CHF199 647 (Swiss francs) on average and yield a gain of 0·52 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CHF385 603 per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that a willingness-to-pay threshold of CHF100 000 per QALY would not be reached at the current US price of trametinib. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of trametinib in Switzerland at US market prices for the treatment of metastatic BRAF V600-mutated melanoma with trametinib plus dabrafenib is unlikely to be cost-effective compared with vemurafenib monotherapy. A reduction in the total price of the combination therapy is required to achieve an acceptable cost-effectiveness ratio for this clinically promising treatment.

Triple negative breast cancer: proposals for a pragmatic definition and implications for patient management and trial design.

In trials in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), oestrogen and progesterone receptor negativity should be defined as < 1% positive cells. Negativity is a ratio of <2 between Her2 gene copy number and centromere of chromosome 17 or a copy number of 4 or less. In routine practice, immunohistochemistry is acceptable given stringent quality assurance. Triple negativity emerging after neoadjuvant treatment differs from primary TN and such patients should not enter TNBC trials. Patients relapsing with TN metastases should be eligible even if their primary was positive. Rare TN subtypes such as apocrine, adenoid-cystic and low-grade metaplastic tumours should be excluded. TN and basal-like (BL) signatures overlap but are not equivalent. Since the significance of basal cytokeratin or EGFR overexpression is not known and we lack validated assays, these features should not be used to subclassify TN tumours. Tissue collection in trials is mandatory so the effect on outcome of different tumour phenotypes and BRCA mutation can be explored. No prospective studies have established that TN tumours have particular sensitivity or resistance to any specific chemotherapy agent or radiation. TNBC patients should be treated according to tumour and clinical characteristics.

Selective intra-arterial chemotherapy with floxuridine as second- or third-line approach in patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: An outcome assessment was performed of patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) treated in second or third line with floxuridine (FUDR)-based hepatic artery infusion (HAI). METHODS: Twenty-three patients who were pretreated with systemic (immuno)chemotherapy received FUDR-HAI alone or combined with systemic chemotherapy. We reviewed patient charts and our prospective patient database for survival and associated risk factors. RESULTS: Patients received FUDR-HAI for unresectable CRLM from January 2000 to September 2010. Twelve patients (52%) received concurrent systemic chemotherapy. Median overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and hepatic PFS were 15.6 months (range, 2.5-55.7 months), 3.9 months (range, 0.7-55.7 months), and 5.5 months (range, 1.6-55.7 months), respectively. The liver resection rate after HAI was 35%. PFS was better in patients undergoing secondary resection than in patients without resection (hazard ratio [HR] 0.21; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.07-0.66; P = 0.0034), while OS showed a trend toward improvement (HR 0.4; 95% CI 0.13-1.2; P = 0.09). No differences were observed in OS (P = 0.69) or PFS (P = 0.086) in patients who received FUDR-HAI alone compared with patients treated with combined regional and systemic chemotherapy. No statistically significant differences were seen in patients previously treated with one chemotherapy line compared with patients treated with two lines. Presence of extrahepatic disease was a negative risk factor for PFS (liver-only disease: HR 0.03; 95% CI 0.0032-0.28; P < 0.0001). Toxicities were manageable with dose modifications and supportive measures. CONCLUSIONS: FUDR-HAI improves PFS and results in a trend toward improved OS in selected patients able to undergo liver resection after tumor is downsized.

Addition of cetuximab to first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adding cetuximab to standard chemotherapy results in a moderate increase of overall survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but the cost-effectiveness is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Markov model was constructed based on the results of the First-Line ErbituX in lung cancer randomized trial, adding cetuximab to cisplatin-vinorelbine first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of adding cetuximab, expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, and relative to a willingness-to-pay threshold of €60 000/QALY. The impact of cetuximab intermittent dosing schedules on the ICER was also evaluated. RESULTS: Adding cetuximab to standard chemotherapy leads to a gain of 0.07 QALYs per patient at an additional cost of €26 088. The ICER for adding cetuximab to chemotherapy was €376 205 per QALY gained. Intermittent cetuximab dosing schedules resulted in ICERs per QALY gained between €31 300 and €83 100, under the assumption of equal efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: From a health economic perspective, the addition of cetuximab to standard first-line chemotherapy in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor-expressing advanced NSCLC cannot be recommended to date, due to a high ICER compared with other health care interventions. Treatment schedules resulting in more favorable cost-utility ratios should be evaluated.

Combining gemcitabine, oxaliplatin and capecitabine (GEMOXEL) for patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma (APC): a phase I/II trial.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine remains the mainstay of palliative treatment of advanced pancreatic carcinoma (APC). Adding capecitabine or a platinum derivative each significantly prolonged survival in recent meta-analyses. The purpose of this study was to determine dose, safety and preliminary efficacy of a first-line regimen combining all three classes of active cytotoxic drugs in APC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients with locally advanced or metastatic, histologically proven adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were treated with a 21-day regimen of gemcitabine [1000 mg/m² day (d) 1, d8], escalating doses of oxaliplatin (80-130 mg/m² d1) and capecitabine (650-800 mg/m² b.i.d. d1-d14). The recommended dose (RD), determined in the phase I part of the study by interpatient dose escalation in cohorts of three to six patients, was further studied in a two-stage phase II part with the primary end point of response rate by RECIST criteria. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were treated with a total of 203 treatment cycles. Thrombocytopenia and diarrhea were the toxic effects limiting the dose to an RD of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² d1, d8; oxaliplatin 130 mg/m² d1 and capecitabine 650 mg/m² b.i.d. d1-14. Central independent radiological review showed partial remissions in 41% [95% confidence interval (CI) 26% to 56%] of patients and disease stabilization in 37% (95% CI 22% to 52%) of patients. CONCLUSION: This triple combination is feasible and, by far, met the predefined efficacy criteria warranting further investigations.

Trastuzumab beyond progression: a cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: The continuation of trastuzumab beyond progression in combination with capecitabine as secondary chemotherapy for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) prolongs progression-free survival without a substantial increase in toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A Markov cohort simulation was used to follow the clinical course of typical patients with MBC. Information on response rates and major adverse effects was derived, and transition probabilities were estimated, based on the results of the Breast International Group 03-05 clinical trial. Direct costs were assessed from the perspective of the Swiss health care system. RESULTS: The addition of trastuzumab to capecitabine is estimated to cost on average an additional of €33,980 and to yield a gain of 0.35 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €98,329/QALYs gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the willingness-to-pay threshold of €60,000/QALY was reached in 12% of cases. CONCLUSION: The addition of trastuzumab to capecitabine in MBC patients is more expensive than what is typically regarded as cost-effective but falls within the value ranges found for established regimens in the treatment of MBC.

Multicenter phase II trial of preoperative induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation with docetaxel and cisplatin for locally advanced esophageal carcinoma (SAKK 75/02).

BACKGROUND: This multicenter phase II study investigated the efficacy and feasibility of preoperative induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery in patients with esophageal carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced resectable squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the esophagus received induction chemotherapy with cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) and docetaxel (Taxotere) 75 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 22, followed by radiotherapy of 45 Gy (25 x 1.8 Gy) and concurrent chemotherapy comprising cisplatin 25 mg/m(2) and docetaxel 20 mg/m(2) weekly for 5 weeks, followed by surgery. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were enrolled at eleven centers and 57 underwent surgery. R0 resection was achieved in 52 patients. Fifteen patients showed complete, 16 patients nearly complete and 26 patients poor pathological remission. Median overall survival was 36.5 months and median event-free survival was 22.8 months. Squamous cell carcinoma and good pathologically documented response were associated with longer survival. Eighty-two percent of all included patients completed neoadjuvant therapy and survived for 30 days after surgery. Dysphagia and mucositis grade 3/4 were infrequent (<9%) during chemoradiation. Five patients (9%) died due to surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: This neoadjuvant, taxane-containing regimen was efficacious and feasible in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer in a multicenter, community-based setting and represents a suitable backbone for further investigation.

Is risk of central nervous system (CNS) relapse related to adjuvant taxane treatment in node-positive breast cancer? Results of the CNS substudy in the intergroup Phase III BIG 02-98 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer central nervous system (CNS) metastases are an increasingly important problem because of high CNS relapse rates in patients treated with trastuzumab and/or taxanes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated data from 2887 node-positive breast cancer patients randomised in the BIG 02-98 trial comparing anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy (control arms) to anthracycline-docetaxel-based sequential or concurrent chemotherapy (experimental arms). After a median follow-up of 5 years, 403 patients had died and detailed information on CNS relapse was collected for these patients. RESULTS: CNS relapse occurred in 4.0% of control patients and 3.7% of docetaxel-treated patients. CNS relapse occurred in 27% of deceased patients in both treatment groups. CNS relapse was usually accompanied by neurologic symptoms (90%), and 25% of patients with CNS relapse died without evidence of extra-CNS relapse. Only 20% of patients survived 1 year from the diagnosis of CNS relapse. Prognosis of CNS relapse was worse for patients with meningeal carcinomatosis when compared with brain metastases. Unexpected findings included a higher rate of positive cerebrospinal fluid cytology (8% versus 3%) and more frequent use of magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis (47% versus 30%) in the docetaxel-treated patients. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence that adjuvant docetaxel treatment is associated with an increased frequency of CNS relapse.

Adding cetuximab to capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase II trial of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research SAKK.

BACKGROUND: To determine the activity and tolerability of adding cetuximab to the oxaliplatin and capecitabine (XELOX) combination in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (MCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a multicenter two-arm phase II trial, patients were randomized to receive oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 every 3 weeks alone or in combination with standard dose cetuximab. Treatment was limited to a maximum of six cycles. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients with good performance status entered the trial. Objective partial response rates after external review and radiological confirmation were 14% and 41% in the XELOX and in the XELOX + Cetuximab arm, respectively. Stable disease has been observed in 62% and 35% of the patients, with 76% disease control in both arms. Cetuximab led to skin rash in 65% of the patients. The median overall survival was 16.5 months for arm A and 20.5 months for arm B. The median time to progression was 5.8 months for arm A and 7.2 months for arm B. CONCLUSION: Differences in response rates between the treatment arms indicate that cetuximab may improve outcome with XELOX. The correct place of the cetuximab, oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combinations in first-line treatment of MCC has to be assessed in phase III trials.